Not to discount the wisdom of facing difficult issues head-on, but I worry about the hypothetical situation where the threat of legalized gay marriage is used as a lever to push through a constitutional amendment that outlaws civil unions, partner's health insurance, and other "legal affects of marriage." I think my point is that steady progress (cf. Civil Rights Movement) will often have a better long-term effect than sudden government-imposed change (cf. Reconstruction.) That said, I'd be very happy if MA's SJC came down with a pro-gay-marriage decision.